Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37464945›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2023

Characterization of boar semen microbiome and association with sperm quality parameters.

Brooke E McAnally, Molly S Smith, Jeffrey G Wiegert, Vignesh Palanisamy, Sapna Chitlapilly Dass, Rebecca K Poole

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Perspectives in porcine semen conservation (liquid and frozen).The Journal of reproduction and development · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Brooke E McAnallyDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.
Molly S SmithDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.
Jeffrey G WiegertDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.
Vignesh PalanisamyDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.
Sapna Chitlapilly DassDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.
Rebecca K PooleDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2471, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Elevated levels of bacteria within fresh extended boar semen are associated with decreased sperm longevity, therefore reducing the fertility of a semen dose. The objective of this study was to characterize the bacterial communities using 16S rRNA sequencing in freshly extended boar semen samples and relate the prevalence and diversity of the microbial population to sperm quality parameters 1) between studs, 2) between pooled and single-sire doses, and 3) over a 5-day period. Eight single-sire (n = 4 per stud) and eight pooled (n = 4 per stud) non-frozen extended semen doses were obtained from two boar studs (A and B). Pooled doses were the composite of the boar's ejaculates used in single-sire doses. Doses were subsampled for 5 d post-collection. Ten negative controls of each pooled dose (n = 2) and single-sire dose (n = 8) remained sealed until the last day. Microbiome analysis was achieved by examining the V4 hypervariable region of the 16S rRNA gene of flash-frozen samples. Two evaluators determined the average sperm motility and agglutination (0: no adhesion to 3: >50% adhesion) by averaging their estimates together at 10 random locations per slide. Stud A had greater sperm agglutination (1.6 vs. 1.0 ± 0.1; P < 0.01) than stud B. Sperm motility decreased over the 5-day period (P < 0.01) and tended (P = 0.09) to be greater in stud B than A (67.4% vs. 61.5% ± 0.02%). Compared with stud A, stud B had a greater relative abundance of Proteobacteria (60.0% vs. 47.2% ± 1.5%; P < 0.01) and a lower relative abundance of Firmicutes (22.5% vs. 31.9% ± 1.4%; P < 0.01). Moreover, stud A had a greater relative abundance of Bacteroidetes (6.3% vs. 5.3% ± 0.4%; P < 0.01) and Actinobacteria (11.5% vs. 10.1% ± 0.5%; P = 0.05) than stud B. Differences were found in alpha diversity for both Chao1 (P < 0.01) and Shannon (P < 0.01) diversity indexes among days 2, 3, 4, and 5 post-collection to day 1. For beta diversity, unweighted UniFrac metric on days 2, 3, 4, and 5 post-collection differed from those on day 1 (P < 0.01). There were significant correlations between sperm motility and relative abundance of Prevotella (r = -0.29), Ruminococcus (r = -0.24), and Bacteroides (r = -0.32). Additionally, there were significant correlations between sperm motility and Chao1 (r = -0.50) and Shannon's index (r = -0.36). These results demonstrate that differences in bacterial communities over time and between boar studs can be associated with variation in sperm quality.

Indexed as

SemenSemen PreservationAnimalsMaleRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSemen AnalysisSpermatozoaSperm MotilitySwineRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sdiversitymicrobiomemotilitysemenswine

Identifiers

PMID37464945
PMCPMC10393202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.